Ethnic conflict and economic development : Jews in Galician agriculture 1868-1914

î.-XtrS- J ' ’>:•?^TSrî^^îîHm3CT^K^3€raÂ^ÂiT^fîTt55f^^*f:;rff*^'3rr?ÎTi- t^rlá'í'l'Tír^ir.'TÍTÍrlj^Sl ::i.’

/ ' c

h

■ i EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE

Department of History and Civilisation

ETHNIC CONFLICT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: JEW S IN GALICIAN AGRICULTURE 1868-1914

•;.0. v. irski

Thesis submitted for asse&sf*’*nt with a view ic obtaining the Degree of Doctor of the European University institute

Exam inai" .jur/:

Prof. Richard Griffiths, European University Institut:

Pr^r‘. Victor IL.î ady, Centre De Sociologie De L ’Education et de la Culture Prof. Rene Lebouttc, European University Institute

Prof. Michael Müller, European University Institute fco-sspervisor) Prof. ^crzy Topolski, University of foznan

February 19"> ! Florence

european UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE 3 0001 0021 5462 5

EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE Department of History and Civilisation

ETHNIC CONFLICT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: JEW S IN GALICIAN AGRICULTURE 1868-1914

Stawomir Tokarski

Thesis submitted for assessment with a view to obtaining the Degree of Doctor of the European University Institute

Examining Jury:

lib

Prof. Richard Griffiths, European University Institute (supervisor) O^<yowo^ Prof. Victor Karady, Centre De Sociologie De L ’Éducation et de la Culture Prof. Rene Leboutte, European University Institute

Prof. Michael Müller, European University Institute (co-supervisor) Prof. Jerzy Topolski, University of Poznan

£.

a

CO

February 1995 Florence

; : v s ^ k ' í K M ' r ^ i M a s e -u h -ui-iaüKi^ïKf* --^H ;‘!í) •,- i

«•■■ % '>

«i « m u ifltM 'Ar.) /if <"

#nv, A.) <>> «wy i, ¿fw ¿rtiv.ifeeMiMi

ih. > >• v/r ü tJfewrfetll «WK|ï> •*& I*.' ^

*-: ,*-: , K • ' aw ‘rn m W t ••ii¡tí**ia; r.qpnu -> ; ; t i N * K i . ; ¿ U ' i í r . < .’ V ‘ ‘ 4tttffcK*¥;Í V •¿•"■■Î ; ;>'." •.. ••;</!* - >í ‘T; “ƒ• ■•;•••» £Wí¿; t*«f 1(l»V.s • . . ' : - - i -T iü »IlítTv • *?>•«:• • r 5'^;

T A B L E O F CO N TEN TS

C h a p te r 1. Ethnie Conflict and Economic Development: Theoretical Issues...1

C h a p te r 2. Natural Growth and Migration: Causes and Indicators...40

C h a p te r 3. Geographical Distribution and Urbanization... 68

C h a p te r 4. Rural Credit Market... 114

C h a p te r 5. Jewish Ethnic Business and Rural Trade Market: Modernization Under Pressure... 186

C h a p te r 6. The Geographical Pattern of Jewish Rural Settlement and the Socio-Economic Standing of the Peasantry...251

C o n clu sio n s... 330

1. E th n ic C onflict and Econom ic D evelopm ent: T heoretical Issues

The title of this chapter is intended to emphasise th a t the author’s prim ary in terest is in the relationship between economic development and ethnic conflict. ‘Relationship’ denotes that the research area is precisely delimited by the intersection of the former with the latter. Accordingly, the study analyzes those economic phenomena which are relevant to, which result from, and which appear to be a cause of ethnic conflict. Similarly, nationalist confrontation is important to us only when it involves economic facts. Economic development is placed in the explanandum of the examined relationship; yet, the connections between its two constituents are often so interwoven th a t by analytical necessity I was forced to analyze causative links running also in the opposite direction.

For an economic historian there is no other country which embodies more fully the mutual dependence between economics and nationalism than Austria-Hungary. The existing approaches to this issue may be divided into two main stream s. One concerns the set of problems labelled nationalism, the other m irrors the interest of economic history in economic development and integration of the Monarchy. Scholars dealing with nationalism try to determine why forces striving for national independence were stronger than the obvious interest of security and prosperity. On the other hand economic historians attem pt to prove th at the chance for prosperity was real, th at is, th a t the process of economic development was gradually encompassing all the provinces of the Empire. Whereas there is no consensus around precise timing of different phases of economic growth, historians seem to accept the conviction th at economic changes in the Monarchy did not follow the direction of political developments1.

1 There is a division between traditional historians (Jaszi, Hertz) and the scholars adhering to recent, quantitative trends in economic history (Good, Gross, Komlos, Huertas, Rudolph). The most representative of the first group is Oscar Jaszi who argued that political disintegration ofthe state radically decreased potential for economic development of the Monarchy. Oskar Jaszi, T he D issolution o f the H absbu rg M onarchy, Chicago 1962. Against this opinion new economic history put forth the contention that "The nationalist struggle may have had a negative effect on the rate of economic growth but it did not prevent it from occurring". David Good, ‘National Bias in the Austrian Capital Market Before World War 1’, inExploration in E con om ic H istory, vol. 14 (1977). Gross is of similar opinion - "In Austria economic growth and industrialisation continues even if

At first sight the second strand of the research seems to include the factor of ethnic conflict in the analysis of economic development. In fact, however, the connection is very vague and superfluous. Economic historians simply take the multinational setting of the development for granted, and, after having claimed that: "In A ustria, unlike in other European countries, the twin forces of nationalism and economic growth were not very complementary"2, they proceed with a more or less standard economic research. Thus, the indeed existing, contradiction assum es purely descriptive character3.

This, however, is not intended as critique. At the scale of the Monarchy nationalist struggle manifested itself mainly on the parliam entary level. The only conceivable way of taking it into account is through counterfactual narratives regarding economic programmes which, due to the lack of support in the Reichstag, ended up with failure. Gerschenkron’s work on Koerber’s plan is an excellent example of such an approach4. The study on the links between economic developments and ethnic divisions may be transformed into a distinct methodological strategy only on the local level of a region or a province. There are two elements which make such an approach meaningful. On one hand, ethnic

not rapid (...) and probably even accelerate towards the end of the century which witnessed the political decline and progressive disintegration of the state". Nachum Gross, ’Austrian Industrial Statistics 1880 - 1885 and 1911/13’, inZ eitschrift fu r die G esam te S taa tsw issen sch aft vol. 2(1968), p. 36.

2 David Good, op. cit., p. 142. Gerschenkron described this situation in a slightly different way: "(...) economic, political and social factors were so closely intertwined in the history of the country in general (...) that it did not seem right to include the word ‘economic’ (in the title)". Alexander Gerschenkron, An E con om ic Spurt th a t F a iled , Princeton 1977, p. 2.

3 The only exception from this pattern is David Good’s study on the financial integration of the Empire. Good attempted to prove the correlation between the percentage of German population and rates of interest charged by Great Viennese banks in different provinces. In other words, his aim was to demonstrate the existence of the national bias on the Austrian capital market. However, he seems misled in choosing the share of Germans as an independent variable - against it one may easily argue that the presence of Germans was in fact derived from the general level of economic development. Therefore, high rates of interest charged in peripheral, backward provinces without German settlements - Galicia and Bukovina - may be explained by other factors, like communications costs, investment risk and costs of acquiring information. See, David Good, op. cit.; Idem, ‘Discrimination in the Austrian Capital Market? A Reply’, inE xploration s in E con om ic H istory vol. 17 (1980), pp. 428-433. For the critique of Good’s approach see, John Komlos, ‘Discrimination in the Austrian Capital Market?’, inIb id em, pp. 421- 427. 4 Alexander Gerschenkron, op. cit. 2

groups existing in the society m ust be of a size th a t implies that their confrontation could have had significant repercussions for the economy as a whole, or for its particular sector. Further, ethnic divisions must be clearly delineated in tangible, economic term s - be it specific economic activities, occupational structure or a different quality of entrepreneurship. On the other hand, it is important to deal with a society in transition, undergoing the process of change, rather than enjoying relative stability. The transformation stage is much more likely to cause the economic dimension of ethnic conflict to come to the fore, because it entails deep alterations in the society’s economic activities. Fo r the same reason, it is more feasible to establish a link between newly emerging economic order and economic behaviour of conflicting ethnic groups.

From this point of view Galicia appears to be an ideal object of research. F irst, it had the largest Jewish community among those living on the Austrian territory in relative and absolute figures. At the peak of its demographic growth Galician Jew s accounted for 11.7 per cent of the land’s general population which made up more than two thirds of the overall Jewish population of Austria. The nature of Jewish economic activities along with the intensity of anti-Jewish feelings it usually generates allows us to assume th at in this instance economic factors and ethnic conflict were particularly closely intertwined. Moreover, the remaining part of Galician society consisted of two different national groups of a more less equal size - Poles and Ukrainians. Although to a lesser degree, their economic activities differed as well: whereas Ukrainians m ay be described as a predominantly peasant nation, Polish society was made up not only by the peasantry but also by a ruling, landowning class of the nobility. Thus, it is possible to investigate and compare two sets of national relations: Jewish-Polish and Jew ish Ukrainian. The second methodological condition - requiring th at the analyzed society experiences dramatic economic changes - is satisfied by the choice of the period under investigation. Time benchmarks are set by two events: the legislation of 1868 and the outbreak of World W ar I. The latter date is a natural historical watershed and it is needless to comment on it. The legislation enacted in 1868 was in fact the set of some legal acts implied by the December patent of 1867. The substance of these acts will be discussed in depth in a later section of

this work, here it is im portant to sta te th at they abolished, in legal term s, the remaining feudal restrictions on the economic liberty of two groups central to our research - th e Je w s and the peasantry. The fact th at the emancipation of these two stra ta of the society coincided m ean t th at it was highly possible th a t there would be a future clash between their changing economic activities. Since this was also the period w hen Galician society departed from tradition and moved towards a modem settin g one is encouraged to expect th at the consequences of this conflict for the economy a re worth studying.

The general backwardness of the country implies the focus on the link between ethnic conflict and economic development within the rural, rath er than the industrial sector of Galician economy. I will argue th a t the changes in the position of Jew s in the rural economy allow us to determine the nature of economic development in th e Galician agricultural sector. Fu rther, it will be demonstrated th at in the years following the emancipation of 1867, Jew s entered new sectors of the rural economy. The rapid expansion of Jewish intermediary services coincided with belated em ancipation of the Galician peasantry, which was achieved through the development of Polish and Ukrainian rural organizations. This coincidence resulted in conflicting economic goals of the two groups; thus, at the sam e time, ethnic conflict determ ined both a course of social mobilization of the peasantry and a tempo of modernization of the Jew ish minority. In this chapter we will make an attem pt to select conceptual tools for a theoretical analysis of the conflict. Alongside the theoretical framework we will review available statistical sources. On this basis we will formulate some preliminary hypotheses.

It is acknowledged th at Galician society after 1867 was characterized by growing anti-Sem itism 5. Virulent anti-Jew ish hostility constituted in a sense a 6

6 After the uprising of 1863 in the Kingdom of Poland, in which Jews actively supported the Polish side, many activists of the Polish independence movement declared that Jews had acquired the right to be treated as a part of Polish society. A similar attitude prevailed for some time in Galicia, but the claims of an end to the Polish-Jewish hostility turned out to be premature. Artur Eisenbach, ‘Problem emancypacji Zyd6w w opinii Wielkiej Emigracji przed powstaniem styczniowym’, inM iqdzy feu dalizm em a kapitalizm em . S tu d ia z dziejdw gospodarczych i spolecznych, Wroclaw 1976, p. 198. In 1893 the Congress of Catholic Peasant Parties declared an economic boycott of the Jews. Six years later, in some counties in Western Galicia, anti-Jewish riots broke out.

p art of the political and economic struggle carried against foreign ethnic groups settled in the agrarian societies of Central and E astern Europe. From this point of view three elements appear to be common in the historical setting of this region. The first comes from the incomplete social structure of native societies, in which a p art of the missing strata was played by ethnic groups of foreign origin (Slovak, Ukrainian and Lithuanian peasant nations, Polish and, to a lesser degree, Hungarian nation composed of both peasantry and nobility). Consequently, the next similarity stem s from the incorporation of ethnic hostility into the ideology of national movements. The intensity of national animosities was additionally augmented by the subordinate status of these nations; Hungary, which after 1867 attained semi-independent status in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, provides an exception in this respect. Finally, the sam e period th at witnessed the phenomenon of national awakening coincided with the gradual dissolution of a feudal economy and the first stirrings of modernization within societies of East-Central Europe.

The persistence of the social and economic distinctiveness of ethnic groups inhabiting this part of the continent stresses the reactive character of links between ethnicity and economic development. It m ay be said th at the modernization of East-Central European societies, as understood in the functionalist approach, was not complete, since it did not eradicate the traditional social order in which ethnic status determined the division of labour. This failure contrasts with the presumption of functionalist theories th a t foresaw the gradual disappearance of‘primordial sentim ents’ under the prevailing impact of functional dependencies on the market6. Thus, unlike in W estern Europe, economic development turned out to be a dividing rather than coalescent factor in shaping the modem nation-state7.

6 Michael Hechter, ‘The Political Economy of Ethnic Change’, inA m erican Jo u rn a l o f S ociology, vol. 79 (1974), p. 1151. For the review of theories seeking for the explanation of persistence of ethnicity see Gary B. Cohen, ‘Ethnic persistence and change: concepts and models for historical research’, inS o cia l S cien ce Q uarterly, vol. 62 (1981), pp. 1028-1041.

7 Rudolf Jaworski, ‘Nationalismus und Ökonomie als Problem der Geschichte Ostmitteleuropas im 19. und zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts’, inG eschichte und G esellsch aft, vol. 8 (1982), pp. 187 -188.

The Jew ish population constitutes the best known example supporting th e theories th at do not associate modernization and ethnic assimilation. Galician Jews formed a p a rt of much larger Jew ish community known as <Ostjudentmn> (Eastern Jew ry )8. The term was accommodated to encompass predominantly Hasidic communities in Eastern Europe whose territory of settlem ent m atched th e territory of the former Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth9. From the eighteenth

8 There is no widely accepted consensus over the terminology relevant to the inner divisions among the Jewry settled in Central East Europe. The issue seems similar to the ambiguities arising around such terms like Central or East Central Europe; due to the variety of social, cultural and economic factors constituting its content it is hard to clearly delimit its boundaries. Holzer writes about two great Jewish communities: Eastern Jewry characterized by its cultural and linguistic ‘yiddishism’ and East-Central Jewry living within the frontiers of Austria-Hungary. Jerzy Holzer, ‘Asymilacja i akulturacja Zydów galicyjskich’, inWiqé, vol. 33/4 (1989), p. 102. Katzburg uses the term Central European Jewry to suggest the a geographic location between Eastern and Western Jewries and a common historical past. Consequently, he includes here the countries of the former Austrian Empire, namely the Republic of Austria, Hungary, the Romanian province of Transylvania and Western Galicia. Natheniel Katzburg, ‘A Social and Economic history of Central European Jewry, in Yehuda Don and Victor Karady (eds), C entral E u rop ean Jew ry between E a st a n d W est, New Brunswick 1990, p. 33. Schramm, similarly to Holzer, describes the Jews of Western Russia, Congress Poland and Galicia as East Central Jewry. Gotfried Schramm, ‘Die Juden in europäischen osten um das Jahr 1900: Zwischenbilanz eines Minderheitproblems’, in Gotthold Rhode (ed), Ju d e n in O stm itteleuropa von d er E m an zip atio n bis zu m ersten W eltkrieg,

Marburg am Lahn, 1990. The most frequently quoted division has been applied by Ezra Mendelsohn. Mendelsohn distinguishes two categories of Jewish community residing in Europe; those belonging to an ‘East European type' and those who may be qualified as being of a West European type’. According to this view, the first type of Jewish community was featured by a low assimilation and acculturation level, retention of Yiddish and the orthodox religion and by a social structure dominated by lower classes. Jewish communities belonging to the West European type were characterized by an advanced process of acculturation and assimilation, abandonment of Yiddish and the orthodox religion and social composition dominated by middle classes of urban origin. Since Mendelsohn does not link his definition to any geographical criteria, his terminology seems to be the most relevant for the description of the variety of Jewish ethnic groups settled in East Central Europe. He emphasises the fact that the area of settlement of these two types of Jewish communities only roughly matches the division between Western and Eastern Europe. The West European type existed not only in France, Great Britain or Germany but also in Bohemia and Moravia, in Hungary and in some parts of Lettonia. Ezra Mendelsohn, ¿ y d zi E u rop y érod k ow o- W schodniej w okresie m iqdzyw ojennym, Warszawa 1992, pp. 27-28.

9 In German literature the term ‘Ostjuden’ was initially identified with ‘Polnische Juden’. In a narrow sense, it denoted the Jews settled on the territories of historical Great Poland and Little Poland. The broader meaning referred to the Jews living on the territory of the former Polish -Lithuanian Commonwealth. In the end of the nineteenth century the term acquired new meaning -it meant Hasid migrants coming to Western Europe (mostly Germany) from eastern ‘shtetls’. The magnitude of these migratory movements gave birth to the so-called ‘Ostjudenfrage’ or ‘Ostjudengefahr’. For the detailed discussion on the definition of ‘Ostjuden’ see, Trude Maurer,

Ostjuden in D eu tsch lan d 1918-1933, Hamburg 1986, pp. 12-16, and Heiko Haumann, G eschichte d er Ostjuden, München 1990.

century until the beginning of the twentieth century Jew s living within its frontiers accounted for about 70 per cent of the overall Jew ish population. Due to a common historic heritage, these communities shared sim ilar cultural, social and economic traits.

This does not mean, however, th a t Jewish communities were free from internal conflicts. In the second half of the nineteenth century Galician Jew ry was divided into three different ideological currents10. The Hassidic movement was the chief bearer of religious trends opposite to those characteristic of the Jew ish communities in the W est. The originator of the modem version of the doctrine was Rabbi Israel Baal-Shem-Tow, born about 1700 in Podolia, the eastern province of the Polish Commonwealth. In the religious sphere the movement m eant devout piety, communion with God and transfer of religious leadership from rabbi to zaddik. The most notable innovation in the communal activity was the lack of traditional elements of cooperation with the authorities and reliance on them. The disciples of Baal-Shem-Tow were against cultural assimilation, the secularization of communal life, customs, education and science.

The Hasidic movement was fiercely attacked by the orthodox echelons of the Galician Jew ry (so called m is n a g d i) . The crux of the argum ent were the different m eans which served for the profession of Jewish religion and tradition. Ecstasy, joy and mysticism practised among Hassids were defied by the orthodox Jew s who argued that the study of judaistic sciences and intellectual achievements in this field were the only way leading to God.

W hat the two religious currents had in common was the idea th at religion is a t the centre of the Jewish community. In this respect Hasidism did not affect the accepted pattern of Jewish society. Among both Hasidi and Misnagdi Jew s Jew ish K u lt u s g e m e in d e performed comprehensive religious, cultural and social

10 On the issue ofreligious divisions within the Galician (Eastern Jewry) see: Raphael Mahler.

H a sid ism an d the Jew ish Enlightenm ent. T heir C onfrontation in G a licia a n d P olan d in the F irst H a l f o f the N ineteenth Century, Philadelphia 1985; Samuel Ettinger, The Internal Struggle in East European Jewry*, in H. H. Ben-Sasson (ed), T he H istory o f the Je w is h People, London 1976, pp. 768-780; Idem, The Hassidic Movement - Reality and Ideals’, inC ahiers d ’histoire m o n d ia le, 1968, pp. 251-266; Idem, ‘Jews and non-Jews in Eastern and Central Europe between the Wars: An Outline’, in Bela Vago and George Mosse (eds), J e w s an d N on -Jew s in E astern E u rop e, Jerusalem 1974; Artur Eisenbach, rWok61 niekt6rych zagadnieri procesu emancypacji Zyd6w w Polsce’, in

functions and was conceived of as a cornerstone of a separate Jew ish social structure. Therefore, the leaders of either form of Jew ry adopted an uncompromising stand against those who aspired for the regeneration of Judaism in the spirit of tim e through religious and educational reforms and for integration in non-Jewish societies. Unlike in Central Europe, however, the controversy between orthodox and non-orthodox (Haskalah) Jew s was a marginal element of the internal strife within the Galician Jew ry11. The well established authority of community leaders, the relatively large concentration of the Jew s, weaker incentives to assim ilate into predominantly peasant Gentile society and, finally, a lack of influential stratum in the Jewish population that aspired to closer contacts with the non-Jewish world as in the west - all this limited the influence of the H askalah movement to the newly risen class of urban wealthy m erchants12.

The conflict between Jew ish ethnic groups and majority societies seen in the long run stemmed from a sim ilar source to that which occurred some centuries ago in western Europe, that is, the rise of a native middle class. W hat makes it different is the fact th at the greater part of Eastern Jew ry was conditioned by a semi-rural environment well into the nineteenth century13. The Jew ish minority constituted in the social and occupational structure of the population an element which, owing to its professional pursuits, was suited to undertake commercial and

11 The only time when the struggle between Haskalah and Hasidism overshadowed other internal divisions within the Galician Jewry was the first half of the nineteenth century. In this period the leaders of the Jewish Enlightenment in Galicia decided to join Austrian authorities in their endeavour to Germanize Jewish population and to ‘rationalize’ its occupational and economic structure. See, Raphael Mahler, op. cit.\ Majer Balaban, D zieje 2 yddw w G alicji i R zeczpospolitej K ra k o w sk iej 1772-1868, Lw6w 1916.

12 The centre of Haskalah movement in Galicia were three large cities in East Galicia - Lviv, Brody and Tamopol. Raphael Mahler, op. cit., p. 47; Samuel Ettinger, The Internal Struggle in East European Jewry*, in H. H. Ben-Sasson (ed), The H istory o f th e Je w is h People, London 1976, p. 785.

13 Jakub Goldberg, ‘Agriculture’, in Nachum Gross (ed), E con om ic H istory o f J e w s, New York 1975, p. 110; Arcadius Kahan, ‘Early Modem Period’,Ib id em, pp. 65-69.

financial services inherent to a feudal economy14. Jewish economic activity was thus based on contacts with the feudal estate; Jew s practically monopolised the functions of manor officials, stewards, overseers, tax collectors, leaseholders of lumber mills and distilleries and liquor franchise holders15. As Marx states, the Jew s lived in the pores of Polish society; small Jewish towns were submerged in a sea of peasant villages and often adjoined the chateaux of the Polish lord16. Consequently, it m ay be assumed th at the antagonism developed primarily in the framework of a rural economy rather than in the urban environment17.

Although the links between economic development and the Jewish-Gentile ethnic conflict are apparent, surprisingly few scholars have studied the issue from this perspective. Most of the scientific interest in Eastern Jew ish communities has focused on social, political and cultural rather than economic m atters. The disproportion is particularly striking among Jewish scholars who, attracted by the, indeed unique, spiritual and cultural tra its of these communities, have worked out a ‘rabbinic approach’ to the Jewish past in Eastern Europe. Efforts to explain a particular event begin with Jewish values and beliefs and the ideologies of the intellectual elite have been assumed to determine the behaviour of all Je w s18. Such a view has resulted from a major paradigm entrenched for long in the works

14 Jacob Goldberg, ‘Poles and Jews in the 17th and 18th Centuries. Rejection or Acceptance’, inJa h r b iic h e r filr G eschichte O steuropas, vol. 22 (1971), p. 260.

16 "In Eastern Europe Jews turned to the countryside more frequently from the 14th century (..) With the development of the "arenda" (leasehold) system and trade in agricultural products, the Jews in Poland and Lithuania became increasingly involved in agriculture as leaseholders of agricultural assets, for instance of distilleries and mills, or as administrators in rural areas". Jakub Goldberg, ‘Agriculture’, in Nachum Gross (ed), E conom ic H istory o f J e w s , New York 1975, p. 110. 16 Quoted after Abram Leon, The Je w is h Q uestion -A M arxist In terpretation , New York 1970, p. 183. 17 "In the West, it was precisely with the rise of a sizeable stratum of middle-class Jews, whose way of life and culture did resemble that of the neighbouring city-dwellers, that forms of Jewish influence and competition intensified among the urban classes". Samuel Ettinger, ‘Jews and non -Jews in Eastern and Central Europe between the Wars’, in Bela Vago and George Mosse (eds), op. cit. p. 3.

18 Calvin Goldscheider and Alan S. Zuckerman, T he T ran sform ation o f the J e w s ,

of the founding fathers of the Jew ish history - Simon Dubnov, Ben-Zion Dinur o r Raphael M ahler. The concept of central importance was the clash between th e forces nourishing internal solidarity and faith within Jewish communities and th e combined forces of change which undermined their organic unity an d cohesiveness19. The history of E astern Jewry was perceived chiefly in term s o f the ideological conflict between Eastern Jewish nationalism and the Je w ish enlightenment, where the latter was identified with the Western m alaise o f parting from Jew ish language and religion. Therefore the bulk of research w as done by historians and sociologists preoccupied with political and ideological m atters and very little by economists. Although among the former were such g re a t authorities as A rth u r Ruppin, Jacob Lestschinsky, Ignacy Schiper, Raphael M ahler and Arieh Tartakow er, they still referred to the economy only in the second instance. Detailed descriptions of Jew ish social and occupational structure and migratory statistics constituted a core of typical accounts of the economic standing of the Jew ry. C haracteristically, whenever the word ‘economic’ appeared in th e title of a historical study it was usually preceded by the word ‘social’. As a resu lt, a great m any valuable monographs notwithstanding, a comprehensive economic history of th e Jew s is still lacking20. Georg Caro’s

Sozial

-

und

Wirtschaftsgeschichte der Juden in M ittelalter und der Neuzeit

1908 and 1924 remains the m ost ambitious, though far from satisfactory undertaking in this respect.

The other problem of Jew ish economic history is the tendency towards narrowing its scope to the, usually overstressed, Jewish-Gentile relationship. The bone of contention is the Jew ish contribution to non-Jewish society and the dispute is usually flawed by the prevailing climate of pro- and anti-Semitism. Those, who attem pt to investigate the economy of Jewish communities in a different context still cling to the concept of

Kleinarbeit

20 Werner Cahnman, The Role and Significance of the Jewish Artisan Class’, in Joseph B. Maier et al. (eds), G erm an Jew ry . Its H istory a n d Sociology. S elected E ssays by W erner J . C ahnm an, New Brusnwick/Oxford 1989, p. xiii.

communities (formulated in the Z e it s c h r ift f ü r d i e G e s c h ic h t e d e r J u d e n in D e u t s c h la n d in 1929), and abstain from a more general approach21. The only consensus th at has emerged until now in the literature is the assertion of the commercial nature of the Jewish economics - a concept which is too ambiguous and only partially true22. Hitherto, much of our knowledge about the nature of Jew ish economic activities has been based largely on unsubstantiated generalizations.

The shortcomings in the scope of Jewish economic history are particularly striking with respect to the Jewish communities settled in Poland. The history of Polish Jew ry was written almost exclusively by authors of Jewish descent which entailed some kind of unilateral approach. Jewish authors either considered the Jew ish community in isolation from the Polish society or limited Polish-Jewish coexistence to the reprehensible discrimination against Jew s by Christians23. The

21 Bernard Weinryb, ‘Prolegomena to the Economic History of Jews in Germany in Modem Times’, inL eo B a ec k Y ear B ook, vol. 1 (1956), p. 285.

22 Werner Cahnman, ‘Introduction’, in Mark Wischnitzer, A H istory o f Jew ish C rafts a n d G u ild s, New York 1965; Idem, The Role and Significance of the Jewish Artisan Class’, in Joseph B. Maier et al. (eds), G erm an Jew ry. Its H istory an d Sociology. S elected Essays by W erner J . C ahn m an , New Brunswick/Oxford 1989. Cahnman argues that Jewish historians have accepted the assumption of the commercial nature of Jewish economic activities without any attempt at challenging, or even scrutinizing this concept seriously. According to his view, the Wischnitzer’s study was the first to investigate the role of the Jewish artisan class in Jewish economics. Ib id em , p. xiii. 23 Jerzy Tomaszewski, ‘Niektdre problemy historiografii dziejow 2yd6w w Polsce XX wieku’, in

B iu letyn ¿ydow skiego Instytutu H istorycznego, 1991, No 2, p. 66; Stefan Kieniewicz, ‘Polish Society and the Jewish Problem in the Nineteenth Century, p. 70. In the postwar Polish historiography the most comprehensive accounts on the Jewish economic history has been written by Artur Eisenbach. See, ‘Wielka wlasno£6 ziemska w r$kach zydowskich’, in Witold Kula (ed),

Spoteczeiistw o K rdlestw a P olskiego, Warszawa 1967;Mobilno§6 terytorialn a lu d n oici zydow skiej w K rdlestw ie P olskim , Warszawa 1967 (published also inR evue des E tu d es Ju iv es, vol. 126 (1966), pp. 435-471);Z dziejdw ludn osci zydow skiej w P olsce w X V III i X IX wieku. S tu d ia i szkice,

Warszawa 1983. The most extensive treatment of the Jewish economic activities in Poland still is to be found in the pre-war studies of Ignacy Schiper. See, S tu d ia n a d stosu n kam i g ospodarczym i zyddw w Polsce p od czas ’* [

ow iecza, Lw6w 1911;D zieje han dlu ¿ydow skiego, Warszawa 1937;H istoria ¿ydow skiego h an d lu na p o ls k ie j ziem i, Warszawa 1937; see also the collection of monographs written by Jewish historians and edited by Schiper, Zydzi w P olsce O drodzonej: dzialaln o66 spoleczna, g osp od arcza, oSw iatow a i ku ltu raln a, 2 vols., Warszawa 1932-1933. Other pre-war economic historians dealing with the issue of Jewish economics were, Josef Tennenbaum, Z ydow skie problem y g osp o d arcz e w G a licji, Wien 1918; Jerzy Gliksman, P olish J e w s from the O ccu pation al an d S ocial V iew point: H istorica l Evolution, P resen t Situation an d F u tu re Perspectives, (in French) Paris 1929; Idem.,

S tru ktu ra spoleczna i zaw od ow a ¿ydow skiej lu d n o ic i w Polsce, Warszawa 1930. See also the works of two non-Polish economic historians, Jakob Lestschinsky and Bernard Weinryb: Jakob Lestschinsky, T he E con om ic Situation o f Je w s in P oland (in yiddish), Berlin 1932; Idem, T he

fact th at Galicia for 150 years was a part of the Austrian Empire did not m odify this state of affairs, since a sim ilar attitude had prevailed among scholars writing' on the A ustrian Jew ry* 19 * * * * 24.

The ta sk of writing about the economics of the Jew s is burdened by tw o sorts of difficulties. First, due to the particular history of the Jewish population, it is difficult to establish the confines of time and space one usually requires fo r the analysis of national economies25. The other obstacle stems from the variety of societies am ong which Jew ish ethnic groups settled throughout the history o f diaspora. Jew ish economic history is an outcome of two different historical processes. One process is the country’s own development and its relations with outer world. The second historical process involved is the internal Jewish situation and the changes it undergoes26. Since the Jewish economics functioned across different legal system s and faced the distinct characteristics of broader societies,

E conom ic S itu a tion o f J e w s since th e W orld W ar: Eastern an d C en tral E urope (in French), Paris 1934; Idem, ‘Poland’, inL a S itu ation E con om iqu e des M inorites Ju ife s , Paris 1939; Bernard Weinryb, T h e J e w s o f P ola n d : A S o c ia l a n d E conom ic H istory o f th e Je w is h Com m unity in P oland, from 1100-1800, Philadelphia 1973; Idem, N euste W irtschaftsgeschichte der Ju d e n in Polen u n d R u ssia, New York 1972; Idem, S tu d ies in the Econom ic a n d S o cia l H istory o f Je w s in P olan d (in Hebrew), Jerusalem 1939. For a complete bibliography see, Gershon C. Bacon and Gershon Hundert, T he J e w s in P ola n d a n d R u ssia: B ib iog rap h ical E ssays, Bloomington 1984.

24 The research on Habsburg Jews made genuine strides only with respect to some social and cultural issues such as Jewish emancipation. See, Wolfgang Hausier (ed), D as Ö sterreichische Ju den tu m . V oraussetzungen und G eschichte, Wien/Munchen 1974; Joseph Frankel (ed), The Jew s o f A ustria, London 1967; William Mccagg, A H istory o f H absbu rg Je w s 1670-1918, Bloomington/Indianapolis 1989; Wolfdieter Bihl, ‘Die Juden’, in Adam Wandruszka, Peter Urbanitsch and Alois Brusatti (eds), Die H absbu rgerm on archie 1848-1918, vol. 3, part 2, Wien 1980; Gotthold Rhode (ed), Ju d e n in O stm itteleuropa. Von d er E m an zipation bis zu m Ersten W eltkrieg, Marburg an der Lahn 1988; Gotfried Schramm, ‘Die Ostjuden als soziales Problem des 19 Jahrhunderts’, in Maus Heinz (ed), G esellschaft, R echt und P olitik. W olfgang A ben droth zum 60 G eburtstag, Neuwied 1960. A conference convened in August 1986 in Paris addressed some of the economic matters concerning Hungarian, Bohemian, Moravian and Austrian Jewry. Yet the largest Jewish group living in Galicia and Bukovina and accounting for 75 per cent of the total Jewish population in the Habsburg Empire was left out of the conference’s mainstream discussion. 26 As put forth by Caro, the problem is that the economic history of a people "concerns a country with geographic delimitations and a state, while the Jews neither have these nor were they a people". Therefore Jewish economic history should study the significance of the specific Jewish economic functions in the framework of the general economic circumstances of a given country and time. Georg Caro, S o zial-u n d W irtschaftsgeschichte der Ju d e n in M ittelalter u n d in d e r Neuzeit,

Frankfort am Main 1924, pp. 1-14.

26 Bernard D. Weinryb, N euste W irtschaftsgeschichte d er Ju d e n in R u ß la n d und P olen , New York 1972, p. VII.

any complete approach to Jewish economic history has to m eet complex standards of cross-cultural analysis27.

More recent works offer a different reading of traditional problems in Jew ish history. As put by Frankel, the new approach is marked by the departure from the grand paradigm shaped out in the nineteenth century, that is from seeing Jew ish history through the dichotomy of assimilation on the one hand and the retention of national identity and ethnic solidarity on the other28. More weight has been given to varied factors of change such as urbanization, industrialisation, migration and m arket forces. A sim ilar shift from sweeping generalizations to differentiation occurred with the greater concentration on regional studies rath er th an on overall analysis. With new historical studies an approach emerged which appears to avoid the pitfalls encountered by its predecessors. The way out of the dilemma inherent to the analysis of Jew ish economic history would be linked to the universal trait of Jewish communities - the fact th at its economic activity m ay be studied as th at of a minority group. As pointed out by Schermerhom, there are underlying features of the minority situation which can be universally found29. If so, the economics of the minority group is one of the m ost important ones. The m ost recent approaches to Jewish economic history make use of this concept in a fairly concurrent way. The focus of attention is on the general characteristics of the minority’s economic behaviour and on the way they respond to the stimuli conveyed by the economy of the resident society. The first theoretical model constructed on these premises was Simon Kuznets’ account of the economy of small minorities (constituting less than 10 per cent of total population), published

27 Different patterns in the majority society and a minority group may result from an infinite variety of societal differences; therefore comparative research is possible rather within a nation­ state territory than among different states. Charles Hirschman, Theories and Models of Ethnic Inequality’, in C. B. Marrett and C. Leggon (eds), R esearch in R ace a n d E thn ic R elation s, vol. 2, Greenwich/Connecticut 1980, p. 26.

28 Jonathan Frankel, op. cit., pp. 18-19.

29 Robert A. Schermerhom, Toward a General Theory of Minority Groups’, inP hylon, vol. 25/3 (1964), p. 238.

in I 9 6 0 30. Although the model proposed some broader assumptions it alluded in the first place to the evidence of Jew ish minorities. Surprisingly, for the next 3 0 years Kuznets’ work escaped the attention of economic historians and it was only very recently th a t his hypotheses have been tested in relation to the Je w ish economics of Central Europe31.

A second theoretical proposition referred to the fact th a t Jew ish groups, unlike most minorities, are situated in the middle, not a t the bottom of the social structure. In th a t respect Jew s a re comparable to Jap anese and Greeks in U nited States, Asians in East Africa or Armenians in Turkey32. The similarity stem s from the intermediary economic position occupied by these communities in non-Jewish societies. Thus such ethnic groups are ‘middleman’ in two senses (1) th e y tend to occupy middle rank positions in the stratification system and (2) they a re likely to be economic middlemen, involved in the movement of goods and services in a society33. As a result, the members of middleman ethnic groups a re predisposed to concentrate in an economic space located between the producer and consumer or employee and employer and may be found primarily in trad e, commerce and money lending. These findings are coherent with the propositions advanced by Kuznets, the difference being an attachm ent to a broader framework of comparison - Jewish economic activities constitute only one example of

30 Simon Kuznets, ‘Economic Structure and Life of the Jews’, in Louis Finkelstein (ed), T h e Jew s, T h eir H istory, Culture a n d R elig ion, New York 1960; Idem, E conom ic S tructure o f U nited States Jew ry . R ecen t T rends, Jerusalem 1972. The summary of the model may be found in Tika Darvish, The Economic Structure of the Jewish Minority in Iraq vis-a-vis the Kuznets Model’, in

Jew ish S o cia l S tu d ies, vol. 47 (1985), pp. 255-266.

31 Yehuda Don, ‘Patterns of Jewish Economic Behavior In Central Europe In the Twentieth Century’, in Y. Don and V. Karady (eds), A S ocial a n d E con om ic H istory o f C entral E u rop ean Jew ry , New Brunswick 1990; Idem, ‘Economic Behaviour of Jews in Central Europe Before World War II’, inE th n ic M inority G roups a n d E conom ic D evelopm ent (1850 -1914), P ap ers fo r 10th In tern ation al E con om ic History C ongress in Leuven, Leuven 1991.

32 Apart from middleman minority theories, similar ideas have been expressed as early as in 1918. Artur Cohen in his article published in Jüdische Statistik noted that: "Die Judenfrage bildet also einen Teil der Minoritatenfrage, und sie musste neben den anderen Teilen derselben, namentlich den volkersoziologischen (Polenfrage, armenische Frage, Zigeunerfrage, Negerfrage, Japanerfrage in America) behandelt werden. Arthur Cohen, ‘Judenfrage und Statistik’, inJü d is c h e S tatistik, Berlin 1918, p. 25. 33 Edna Bonacich and Jonathan Turner, Toward Composite Theory of Middleman Minorities’, inE thn icity, vol. 7 (1980), p. 144.

economics of the middleman minority - and its links to new theories propagated within modem social theory. As argued by Zuckerman and Goldscheider, the analysis of the Jew s in a comparative framework is the road to integrating the analysis of the Jew s with the study of other people within the domain of social (and economic) science. The uniqueness of the Jew s may serve well as a principle of Jew ish theology but the new mode of analysis demands the means of comparing the Jew s with other people34.

The theory accepted the term ‘middleman minorities’ to encompass salient features of all minorities of this sort35. There is no general consensus over the causes explaining the particular position occupied by some ethnic groups in particular societies. Contesting explanations focus on the nature of resident societies, cultural characteristics of middleman minorities or on the structure of a given historical situation36. Obviously, these approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive and particular cases m ay be feasibly framed within each of the theories37. Middleman minority theories subscribe to a dualist paradigm which seeks to demonstrate th at in the process of capitalist development ethnicity should be viewed as the conclusion of a social process rather than its starting point38.

34 Calvin Goldscheider and Alan S. Zuckerman, op. cit., p. 4.

35 The term was used for the first time by Hubert Blalock, T ow ard a Theory o f M inority G rou p R ela tio n s, New York 1967.

36 To provide a more extensive sort of overview of middleman minority theories would be duplicating existing work; for more extended reviews see, Edna Bonacich and John Modell, T he E con om ic B asis o f E thn ic S olidarity, Berkeley 1980; Werner Zenner, ‘Middleman Minority Theories and the Jews’, inW orking P apers in Y iddish a n d E ast E u ropean S tu d ies, vol. 31 (1978); Jose Cobas, ‘Six Problems of the Sociology of the Ethnic Economy, inS ociolo g ical Perspectives, vol. 32 (1989), pp. 201-214; Idem, ‘Paths to Self-Employment Among Immigrants. An Analysis of Four Interpretations’, inIb id em , vol. 29 (1986), pp. 101-120. 37 Bonacich and Turner in their recent article attempt to construct a single theoretical approach incorporating all former concepts into the framework of ‘composite middleman minority theory. Edna Bonacich and Jonathan Turner, Toward Composite Theory of Middleman Minorities’, in E thn icity, vol. 7 (1980), pp. 144-158.

38 Yoad Peled and Gershon Shafir, ‘Split Labor Market and the State: The Effect of Modernization on Jewish Industrial Workers in Tsarist Russia’, inA m erican Jo u rn a l o f S ociology

Middleman minorities may be defined not only by the economic position occupied in the resident society but also by the way they organize their economic activities39. In general such groups abstain from occupations th a t require investment tying up large capital and assuming relatively long turnover40. Therefore, it is hard to find them in agriculture or m odem industry. There are two reasons for this situation. In the first place, since middleman minorities are delimited in the society by ethnic solidarity, it seems rational th at their economics base on a small, usually family owned enterprise. Only in such an environment, economic advantages of ethnic solidarity - business tips, low interest loans or rotating credit associations - become perceivable and prevent entrenched monopolies of ethnic groups from breaking41. On the other, hand middleman minorities choose easy-to-liquidate business arrangem ents due to their migratory origin42 and because of their vulnerability to different forms of discrimination43.

39 Unlike Zenner who bases his definition of middleman minorities on overrepresentation of their members in trade, commerce and banking, Bonacich prefers to use self-employment and working within the ethnic group as the key criterion. Walter P. Zenner, ‘Ethnic Solidarity in Three Middleman Minorities’,P aper r e a d at th e A nnual M eeting o f the A m erican A nthropologist A ssociation in 1976, p. 2; Edna Bonacich and John Modell, T he Econom ic B a sis o f Ethnic S olidarity. S m a ll B u sin ess in the J a p a n e s e A m erican C om m unity, Berkeley/Los Angeles/London

1980, p. 23.

40 Edna Bonacich, ‘A Theory of Middleman Minorities’, inA m erican S ociological R eview , vol. 38 (1973), pp. 583-594.

41 Middleman minority theory focus on the salience of ethnic solidarity in relation to the socio­ economic attainment of middleman groups. Nee and Sanders point to the limits of this perspective; "ethnographic accounts provide ample evidence on intense factionalism and competition thatrender ethnic collective action problematic". According to this view, when ethnic solidarity is mobilised, it is typically a temporary reaction to interethnic competition. Jimmy M. Sanders and Victor Nee, ‘Limits of ethnic solidarity in the enclave economy*, inA m erican S ociolo g ical R eview vol. 52 (1987), pp. 764-765. Against this perspective Bonacich and Light tend to view ethnic solidarity as a long lasting phenomenon, which forms a response to the structural hostility or discrimination on the side of the host society. Edna Bonacich, op. cit., p. 584. 42 Members of migration groups may be described as ‘sojourners’ or ‘marginal men’. Usually they reach a country of destiny with the aim of earning a certain amount of money and returning back to the motherland. This attitude results in a low level of consumption, high labour input and involvement in branches with a low fixed capital level. Although often they stay in a new place forever, such behaviour may be cultivated by next generations. Paul Siu, The Sojourner’, in A m erican Jo u r n a l o f S ociology, vol. 58 (1952/53), pp. 34-44; Robert E. Park, ‘Human Migration and the Marginal Man’,Ib id em , vol. 83 (1978), pp. 881-893. 43 Minorities refrain from involvement in the public sector where their economic activity may be easily affected by discriminatory legislation. Yehuda Don, ‘Patterns of Jewish Economic Behavior In Central Europe In the Twentieth Century*, in Y. Don and V. Karady (eds), op. cit. The 1 6

Jewish groups possess all the features typical of middleman minorities. Despite the variety of societies in which they have settled throughout the history of the diaspora, they have tended to concentrate on a consistent cluster of occupations. As with other ethnic groups occupying intermediary positions in broader societies Jew s participated very slightly in agriculture44 or in the public sector45; instead they engadge in trade and finance. W ithin the trade sector, commodity trade was the most im portant branch. Moreover, there tended to be further specialization within commodity trade, that is, Jew s were likely to be found in the retail food trade, textiles and groceries.

The second important component to the Jew ish economics was the industrial sector and handicrafts. Specialization within industry reflects the way Jew ish entrepreneurship was organized. The most im portant branch is th at of finished consumer goods (garments, leather, printing) and the food industry (including drinks and tobacco). The respective shares of mining, m etals, construction and other industries requiring large investments are below level with

experience of fascist regimes shows that the public sector is the first objective of anti-Jewish legislation. See, for example, Idem, ‘The Economic Dimension of Anti-Semitism. Anti-Jewish Legislation in Hungary 1938-1944’, inE a st E u rop ean Q uarterly, vol. 20 (1987) pp. 447-465.

44 The reasons for this slight participation in agriculture are numerous and most of them have been extensively treated in the literature. The deriding factor was political and legal limitations on land ownership and use. When finally, in the nineteenth century, emancipation opened agriculture to the Jews it was no longer a promising industry, which would attract either Jewish immigrants or the local Jewish population. Simon Kuznets, op. cit., p. 1606; Yehuda Don, Yehuda. ‘Economic Behaviour of Jews in Central Europe Before World War II’, inE thn ic M inority G roups a n d E conom ic D evelopm ent (1850 -1914), P ap ers fo r 10th In tern ation al E conom ic H istory C ongress in L euven , Leuven 1991, p. 117. Besides relatively small returns to labour and capital another reason was the relatively high price of land and the hostility of the peasant environment. Therefore the only possible form of Jewish settlement in the countryside was through the establishment of colonies. Arcadius Kahan, The Transition Period’, in Nachum Gross (ed), op. cit., p. 92. The situation of the Galician Jewry stands out in this respect; due to the underdevelopment of the country and its position within the Austro-Hungarian economy, the area open to Jewish economic activity outside the agricultural sector was limited. 45 Refraining from activity in the public sector was particularly striking among Eastern Jewish communities due to the lack of elements of cooperation with authorities embedded in the organization of the Hasidic movement. Certain elements of the Hasidic community were simply incongruous as they were based on social and religious unity, independent of state authorities and practically directed against them. Samuel Ettinger, The Internal Struggle in East European Jewry*, in H. H. Ben-Sasson (ed), The H istory o f the Jew ish People, London 1976, p. 4.

respect to the shares adm inistered by non-Jews46.

In the light of w hat has been said so far we m ay attem pt to sketch th e theoretical framework for the analysis of the ethnic conflict in Galicia. Since another typical feature of middleman groups is the fact th at it usually generates hostility in the resident society, th e concept of a middleman minority seems to be the most appropriate theoretical device for the study. It should be noted th at th e analysis of economic issues within this framework forces us to consider an y reaction of the resident society against a m inority in rational categories. Accordingly, the work concentrates on the questions as expressed through actions and not through attitudes. It seems legitimate then, to define Galician Jew s as an economic interest group47. Simply put, Jew s came into the confrontation with th e resident society because elements in each group had contradictory economic goals. Stryker noted th at, since not all middleman minorities are subjected to system atic prejudice, the middleman economic position eventuates in system atic prejudice only as a part of a complex structural variable. One of its primary elements would be economic relationships - p atterns centering around the production and distribution of goods48. Following this line of reasoning, the emphasis should be

46 Simon Kuznets, op. cit., pp. 1597-1666. There is at least one example contradictory to the model - large Jewish investment in the modern textile industry in Lòdi, at the end of the nineteenth century and in the beginning of the twentieth century. On this issue, see Filip Friedman, ‘Rola zydów w rozwoju lódzkiego przemyslu wlókienniczego", inM iesiqcznik Z ydow ski, voi. 1/1 (1930-31), pp. 431-450. 47 The term ‘economic interest group’ constitutes nothing else than the reformulation of the Marxist approach to Jewish economic history. As it is known, Marx perceived the problem of Jewish emancipation as a social rather than a religious issue. Accordingly, only a study of the economic role played by the Jews may explain the preservation of the Jewish religion and identity. The concept of the Jews as a social class has been applied in Abram Leon’s book on Jewish economic history (Abram Leon, op. cit.). Although we do not adhere to sweeping generalizations suggested by Leon we believe that the Marxist approach to some periods in Jewish economic history may be worthwhile. Regarding their economic position, Jewish groups in Eastern Europe are those whose economics should be studied from this perspective in the first instance. The class aspect of the Jewish question was noted by Jacob Lestschinsky who wrote about Eastern Jews that "Der ausseren Welt gegenüber waren alle Juden daher nicht nur eine besondere ethnische und religiose, sondern auch eine soziale, eine Klasseneinheit". Jacob Lestschinsky, ‘Fragen der Ostjudischen Wirtschaftslebens’, inD er J u d e voi. 1 (1915/1916), p. 161. 48 Stryker Sheldon, ‘Social Structure and Prejudice’, inS o c ia l P rob lem s, vol.5 (1957), pp. 341-353.

laid on the fact th at the prejudice on the resident society side is generated by a ‘middleman economic position’. ‘Economic’ implies two contexts: 1) the way the prejudice is shaped is different from the prejudice generated by religious, cultural or psychological aspects 2) the behaviour of majority driven by such prejudice (i. e. actions taken against economic activities of middleman minority, formulation of the ideology directed against middleman groups, the composition of main social carriers of such ideology) may be best explained by referring to terms like unequal allocation of resources, economic interest or modernization of the broader society. In feudal society, the economic ten et of the conflict did not come to the fore because the Jew s had no economic counterpart to some of the social groups (court nobility, gentry and peasantry) and thus the problem of economic competition could not enter into the relationship49. The only exception were non-Jewish m erchants and craftsmen; two groups which in Eastern Europe were of limited size. Economic interests gained importance during the period of transition to the capitalist economy when the status of middleman minority is no longer out of contest. It does not necessarily mean defying the approach professed by social psychology th at the majority’s hostility is generated from cultural traditions, belief system s or psychological problems of the majority50. I will argue however, th a t in the period under investigation, economic factors were of prim ary importance for the explanation of the course and intensity of the ethnic antagonism. This view

49 Arcadius Kahan, ‘Early Modern Period’, in Nachum Gross, op. cit., p. 71.

50 Mainstream study in the field of social psychology has convincingly demonstrated the mechanisms linking anti-Semitism to the authoritarian personality and the process by which a personal prejudice finds its way in a given social situation. Out of a pile of classic texts one may refer here to Georg W. Allport, The N atu re o f P reju d ice, Mass. 1973; Theodor W. Adorno et al., T he A u thoritarian P erson ality, New York 1950; E. Simmel (ed), A n tisem itism : A S ocial D isease, New York 1946. According to Bonacich, the recognition of the economic background of the ethnic conflict directly challenges pure-prejudice theories, that is, it challenges the assumption that racial and cultural differences in themselves prompt the development of ethnic conflict. Edna Bonacich, ‘A Theory of Ethnic Antagonism: The Split Labor Market’, inA m erican S ociological R eview vol. 38 (1973), pp. 547-559. This opposition is derived from a more general theoretical stance which contrasts merits of economic theories of social causation with those that have stressed ideological factors such as belief systems, mental outlooks or religious motivations. Such a radical contradiction between an economic approach on one hand and a sociological or psychological approach on the other appears overdrawn. Since socio-economic factors condition each other within the social structure it is obvious that a purely ‘materialistic’ interpretation is difficult to sustain. Werner Cahnman, ‘Socio-economic Causes of Antisemitism’, inS ocial P roblem s, vol. 6, (1958), p. 22. For more extended treatment of this issue, see Hubert Blalock, op. cit.

may be aptly posited in the broader theoretical framework outlined in the r e c e n t

works of Goldscheider and Zuckerm an. The principal tenet of their approach to t h e history of Jew ish communities is th at issues such as population c h a n g e , urbanization pattern and occupational concentration - rather than the J e w s ’ ‘modern values’, ‘capitalistic m entality’ or ideological and religious com m itm en ts

-account prim arily for Jew ish responses to modernization51.

Before proceeding I shall point out to some complications in the a p p licatio n of middleman minority theory to the Jewish ethnic group in Galicia. The m a j o r drawback is a consequence of th e fact th at this approach rests almost e n tir e ly upon the evidence of im m igrants to the industrial economy of the United S t a t e s in the nineteenth and tw entieth centuries. Therefore, the theory places r e c e n t migratory origin and urban residence among the constitutive elements of a n y middleman minority. Consequently, when explaining the nature of their econ om ic activity and organization, the theory resorts to such issues as skills brought b y immigrants from the country of th eir origin, difficulties when entering a lr e a d y established economies, motivation for thrift, or concentration in ethnic enclaves52. Light rightly discerned the ensuing problem for the treatm ent of the J e w is h groups in Europe, which were active in trade long before Zionism opened the ro a d s to repatriation in Palestine53. Zenner, in his review of the middleman m in o rity literature, is of similar opinion: m ost E a st European Jew s had lived in E a s te r n Europe from birth and their ancestors were rooted in this territory equ ally. Therefore, they may still be regarded as strangers, but not as sojourners54. T h is 61 62 63

61 Calvin Goldscheider and Alan S. Zuckerman, op. cit., p. 229.

62 For a review of explanations of middleman minority entrepreneurship based on the evidence of immigrant groups see, Jose A. Cobas, ‘Paths to Self-Employment Among Immigrants. Analysis of Four Interpretations’, inS ociolog ical P erspectives, vol. 29 (1986), pp. 101-120; Idem, ‘Ethnic Enclaves and Middleman Minorities. Alternative Strategies of Immigrant Adaptation?’, I b i d e m , vol. 30 (1987), pp. 143-161. 63 Ivan Light, ‘Disadvantaged Minorities in Self-Employment’, inIn tern ation al J o u r n a l o f C om parative S ociology, vol. 20/1-2, p. 33. 54 Walter P. Zenner, op. cit., p. 20. A way out of this impasse has been suggested by Yehuda Don. Don has noted that landlessness (typical of Jewish minorities) or the absence of a specific territorial base creates a situation which, in certain aspects, is similar to that of an immigrating